Quality Of Life Utility Scores Research Articles

Improvement in quality of life comparing noninvasive versus invasive hearing rehabilitation in children.

The young population requires early rehabilitation of their hearing loss for normal cognitive, auditive hence social development. All of which, in turn, may have an impact on quality of life (QoL). This study aims to evaluate QoL between two different bone conduction (BC) hearing devices: a noninvasive adhesive hearing aid (Adhear [ADH]) vs. an active transcutaneous implant (Bonebridge [BB]). This study composed of 12 BB and 15 ADH users. Pure tone as well as speech in noise and quiet measurements were evaluated and compared to the Assessment in QoL questionnaire (AQoL-6d). Freefield results showed significant improvements for both devices compared to the unaided condition (p< .0001). Emphasis needs to be drawn on the different unaided level of conductive hearing loss as well as the indication range for both evaluated device groups: the ADH subjects exhibited a mean BC value of 9.50 ± 7.96 dB HL (the indication range up to 25 dB) and the BB subjects a mean of 23.33 ± 25.66 dB HL (the indication range up to 45 dB). Speech perception in quiet and in noise was significantly improved (p< .05; p< .001, respectively). QoL was significantly improved for both treatments (p< .05) but was not different among the devices, and the values were similar to their normal hearing, age, and sex-matched control group. High correlations were found between QoL utility scores and improved PTA4 in the aided condition (r 2 = .8839 and .7810 for BB and ADH, respectively). Our results show that both devices offer significant beneficial audiological rehabilitations with significantly increased QoL. However, the underlying condition and the unaided degree of hearing loss, hence the required higher stimulation must be the deciding factor when opting for a hearing device, and this should be independent of age. 2c.

Spinal Cord Stimulation–Naïve Patients vs Patients With Failed Previous Experiences With Standard Spinal Cord Stimulation: Two Distinct Entities or One Population?

IntroductionNowadays, the success of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is evaluated separately in patients who have previous experiences with standard SCS and in SCS-naïve patients. Nevertheless, it is yet to be evaluated whether both patient groups are effectively distinct patient groups. Therefore, the aims of this study are twofold: 1) Are there clusters in the data to distinguish between both patient groups? 2) Can we discriminate both patient groups based on routinely collected clinical parameters? Materials and MethodsBaseline data from the Discover study were used, in which 263 patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2 were included (185 neurostimulation-naïve patients and 78 patients with previous SCS experience). Pain intensity scores for low back and leg pain, functional disability, medication use, and health-related quality of life utility scores were used in the analysis. Model-based clustering was performed on standardized data. Discriminant analysis was performed with linear and quadratic discriminant analysis, with leave-one-out cross-validation to evaluate model performance. ResultsModel-based clustering revealed two different clusters in the data. None of the clusters clearly separated SCS-naïve patients from patients with previous SCS experience. Linear discriminant analysis resulted in a leave-one-out cross-validation error rate of 30.0% to discriminate between both patient groups, based on routinely collected clinical parameters. ConclusionsClustering analysis did not result in clusters that separate SCS-naïve patients from patients with previous SCS experience. This may suggest that both patient groups should not be considered as two different patient groups when comparing them on routine clinical parameters, with potentially profound implications for research and clinical settings. Clinical Trial RegistrationThe Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the Discover study is NCT02787265.

Impact of adverse events on quality of life and hospital costs in secondary cardiovascular disease prevention

Abstract Background and purpose People with atherosclerotic vascular disease remain at high risk of cardiovascular (CVD) events despite effective risk factor management 1. There is little research on impacts of adverse events on quality of life (QoL) and hospital cost to inform evaluations of novel interventions in this population. We estimate QoL and annual hospital costs associated with a range of adverse events of interests using the individual participant data from the Randomized Evaluation of the Effects of Anacetrapib through Lipid Modification (REVEAL) trial. Methods Data from the 30,449 participants with atherosclerotic vascular disease receiving effective statin therapy in REVEAL, were used to estimate regression models for participants' hospital costs and QoL using participants' characteristics at entry (socio-demographic, clinical, prior diseases and treatments) and time-updated adverse events. We estimate costs and QoL in the year of an event, and in subsequent years, using stepwise covariate selection (p-value &amp;lt;0.01). Standard errors were adjusted for clustering of participant annual costs. Hospital episodes were costed (2019 UK£) using the UK Healthcare Resource Groups reference costs 2. One- and two-part generalized linear regression models (GLMs) for annual hospital costs (part 1: logistic model for estimating probability of incurring cost, part 2: GLM with Gaussian, Poisson or Gamma distributions with identity or log links for estimating costs, conditional on incurring any) were compared. EQ-5D-5L questionnaires, completed by study participants at entry and final follow-up visits in the study, were mapped into QoL utility scores 3. QoL utility at final follow-up was used to estimate QoL decrements of adverse events using GLM linear model and adjusting for QoL at entry in addition to other participants characteristics. Results The two-part model with gamma distribution and identity link, indicated by specification tests and model fit statistics, was selected for modelling annual hospital costs (Figure 1). Non-haemorrhagic stroke, non-coronary revascularization, coronary revascularization and incident cancer were associated with highest hospital costs. The QoL model (Figure 2) indicated large QoL decrements associated with non-fatal non-haemorrhagic stroke, heart failure hospitalization, incident cancer and non-coronary revascularization, and comparatively small QoL decrement associated with experiencing non-fatal myocardial infarction. Conclusion These cost and QoL models in a well-managed contemporary high CVD risk patient population would assist in assessments of long-term net effects and cost-effectiveness of novel interventions to reduce cardiovascular risk. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Other. Main funding source(s): Merck Sharp &amp; Dohme and UK Medical Research Council Figure 1Figure 2

A group program for overweight and obese women with urinary incontinence (ATHENA): an implementation-effectiveness hybrid type 3 study.

Supervised pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), weight loss and exercise are recommended for overweight/obese women with urinary incontinence (UI). This study aimed to implement and evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a 12-week group exercise and healthy eating program (ATHENA) for overweight/obese women with UI. This study, using an implementation-effectiveness hybrid type 3 design, was conducted within a Women's Health Physiotherapy outpatient service at an Australian tertiary public hospital. Intervention feasibility and acceptability were assessed through process evaluation of implementation, while clinical effectiveness was assessed via pre-/post-clinical and quality of life surveys. Process data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and effectiveness data were compared pre-/post-intervention using inferential statistics. Of 156 eligible patients, 37 (24%) agreed to participate; 29 (78%) completed the ATHENA program. Median (IQR) age and body mass index were 53 (47-65) years and 30.8 (29.1-34.8) kg/m2 respectively. ATHENA was feasible to implement, with all components delivered as intended and high participant satisfaction. Ninety-seven percent of participants reported improved UI symptoms (global rating of change) and significant improvements in overall pelvic floor dysfunction and quality of life utility scores (p = 0.001). While weight did not change, significant improvements were found in body-food choice congruence (intuitive eating scale-2; p < 0.01). The ATHENA intervention was feasible, acceptable and clinically effective for overweight and obese women with urinary incontinence at a tertiary public hospital in Australia. Further research into longer term outcomes and the cost effectiveness of this group intervention is recommended. N/A. Ethics approval, HREC/2018/QGC/46582, date of registration 14/11/2018.

Cost utility analysis of cryopreserved amniotic membrane versus topical cyclosporine for the treatment of moderate to severe dry eye syndrome

BackgroundThe purpose is to perform a cost effectiveness analysis amniotic membrane vs. topical medications in the use of treating dry eye disease. A cost effectiveness analysis comparing amniotic membrane + other topical medications to topical cyclosporine A + other topical medications was evaluated using accepted decision tree modeling software.MethodsTreeAge Pro 2019 software was used to evaluate the base case costs over a one year timeframe. Sensitivity analysis was performed on those variables which had the greatest effect on choosing one therapy versus the other based on cost. Monte Carlo simulation was run 1,000 times to determine the most effective, least costly alternative. Costs were evaluated from a societal level (direct + indirect). Quality of life utility scores were evaluated using known time tradeoffs from prior studies (scale 0–1; with 1 being perfect vision).ResultsOver a one year timeframe, the base case demonstrated that amniotic membrane + topical medications was the less expensive alternative and provided for incremental utilities versus topical cyclosporine + other medications (Cost/utility: $18,275/0.78 vs. $20,740/0.74). If examining direct costs only, topical cyclosporine was the least expensive option over a one year timeframe: $4,112 vs. $10,300. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that in order for topical cyclosporine to be the less expensive alternative the following variables would need to be: < 68 days productivity lost; < $161 productivity lost/day; > 79% of amniotic membrane implants would need to be re-implanted at month 4 (for whatever reason); > $2677 per amniotic membrane implant procedure (Medicare reimbursement rate); > 96% positive response to topical cyclosporine A at month 4; > 58% positive response to topical cyclosporine A at month 6 and; < 54% probability clinical improvement with amniotic membrane. Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated that amniotic membrane was the less costly, most effective alternative 91.5% of the time.ConclusionBased on improved outcomes using amniotic membrane, patient productivity was improved resulting in lower societal costs (less days lost from work). When considering the untoward effects of dry eye disease on societal costs, an improvement of the dry eye disease condition was accomplished most often with amniotic membrane.

What is the Responsiveness and Quality of Life “Utility” for PROMIS Outcomes in Foot and Ankle Patients Following Physical Therapy?

Category:OtherIntroduction/Purpose:Patients with foot and ankle conditions have been shown to demonstrate improvement in their generic outcomes using the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS). However, the responsiveness to change and the impact change may have on quality of life has not been explored following non-operative care with physical therapy. The effect size (ES) is an assessment of the magnitude of change while the impact of change in physical function can be assed with quality of life utility scores. Therefore, the purpose of this analysis was to investigate the responsiveness of the PROMIS physical function (PF) scale on changes in quality of life.Methods:The PROMIS PF scale was available at the start and end of physical therapy treatment for 352 patients with foot and ankle ICD10 codes. PF was chosen as a good outcome measure to assess overall outcome from physical therapy care. Changes from baseline to post-care were examine using Cohen’s d to remove dependence on sample size and was interpreted as d=0.20 as a small effect, d=0.05 as a medium effect, and d=0.80 as a large effect. Using available isotonic regression with linear interpolation functions, health state utility scores were calculated from the PROMIS PF scores. These scores represent a health state between 0, representing ‘being dead’, and 1 being the utility of ‘full health’. This methodology has been shown to be reliable and valid for assessing overall health quality of life from changes in physical function. Repeated measures ANOVA models were used to compare outcomes across time.Results:A significant improvement (p<0.01) in PF scores was seen across the sample following physical therapy (PF t-score; baseline 38.6+-8.8; follow-up 45+-9.1). This change was associated with a moderate to large ES of 0.75. The average ES for those subjects with a starting t-score less than 45 (n=294) was 0.86 (large effect) while for those with a starting t-score of greater than 45 (n=58) was 0.27 (small effect). There was also a significant (p<0.01) improvement in utility scores following physical therapy (utility score; baseline 0.58+-0.2; follow-up 0.72+-0.2).Conclusion:There is a general improvement in reported physical function following physical therapy but the magnitude of this effect depends on baseline function. Lower function is associated with greater changes. Improvement in physical function was associated with an overall improvement in quality of life. The non-linear nature of utility scores suggests some patients may have large increases in quality of life with small changes in physical function.

Repositioning for pressure injury prevention in adults.

Repositioning for pressure injury prevention in adults.

Pulmonary Hypertension: A Contraindication for Lung Volume Reduction Surgery?

Historically, pulmonary hypertension (PH) has been considered as one of the contraindications for lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS). Newer studies have shown that LVRS is successful in select emphysema patients with PH. In-hospital and 1-year functional and quality of life (QOL) outcomes were studied in patients with PH post-LVRS. PH was defined as pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) exceeding 35 mm Hg by right heart catheterization (RHC), where available, or else exceeding 35 mm Hg by echocardiogram. Of 124 patients who underwent LVRS, 56 (45%) had PH (mean PAP, 41 mm Hg) with 48 mild to moderate and 8 severe PH. In-hospital outcomes were similar between patients with and without PH: hours of artificial ventilation (1.8 vs 0.06, P= .882), days in intensive care (4 vs 6, P= .263), prolonged air leak (12% vs 19%, P= .402), and days of hospital stay (13 vs 16, P= .072). Lung function improved significantly at the 1-year follow-up in patients with PH: forced expiratory volume in 1 second % predicted (26 vs 38, P= .001), forced vital capacity % (62 vs 90, P= .001), residual volume % predicted (224 vs 174, P= .001), diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide % predicted (36 vs 43, P= .001), 6-minute walk distance test (1104 vs 1232 feet, P= .001), and QOL utility scores (0.67 vs 0.77, P= .001). There were no differences in in-hospital, baseline, and follow-up functional and QOL outcomes between patients with and without PH. In this small, single-institution cohort, outcomes of patients undergoing LVRS for emphysema with PH were similar to those of patients without PH. LVRS may be a potential option for select emphysema patients with PH.

Economic evaluation of Indigenous health worker management of poorly controlled type 2 diabetes in north Queensland.

To conduct an economic evaluation of intensive management by Indigenous health workers (IHWs) of Indigenous adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes in rural and remote north Queensland. Cost-consequence analysis alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial of an intervention delivered between 1 March 2012 and 5 September 2013. Twelve primary health care services in rural and remote north Queensland communities with predominantly Indigenous populations. Indigenous adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥ 69 mmol/mol) and at least one comorbidity (87 people in six IHW-supported communities (IHW-S); 106 in six usual care (UC) communities). Per person cost of the intervention; differential changes in mean HbA1c levels, percentage with extremely poor HbA1c level control, quality of life, disease progression, and number of hospitalisations. The mean cost of the 18-month intervention trial was $10 060 per person ($6706 per year). The intervention was associated with a non-significantly greater reduction in mean HbA1c levels in the IHW-S group (-10.1 mmol/mol v -5.4 mmol/mol in the UC group; P = 0.17), a significant reduction in the proportion with extremely poor diabetes control (HbA1c ≥ 102 mmol/mol; P = 0.002), and a sub-significant differential reduction in hospitalisation rates for type 2 diabetes as primary diagnosis (-0.09 admissions/person/year; P = 0.06), with a net reduction in mean annual hospital costs of $646/person (P = 0.07). Quality of life utility scores declined in both groups (between-group difference, P = 0.62). Rates of disease progression were high in both groups (between-group difference, P = 0.73). Relative to the high cost of the intervention, the IHW-S model as implemented is probably a poor investment. Incremental cost-effectiveness might be improved by a higher caseload per IHW, a longer evaluation time frame, and improved service integration. Further approaches to improving chronic disease outcomes in this very unwell population need to be explored, including holistic approaches that address the complex psychosocial, pathophysiological and environmental problems of highly disadvantaged populations. ANZCTR12610000812099.

Using WOMAC Index scores and personal characteristics to estimate Assessment of Quality of Life utility scores in people with hip and knee joint disease

To determine whether Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) utility scores can be reliably estimated from Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores in people with hip and knee joint disease (arthritis or osteoarthritis). WOMAC and AQoL data were analysed from 219 people recruited for a national population-based study. Generalised linear models were used to estimate AQoL utility scores based on WOMAC total and subscale scores and personal characteristics. Goodness of fit was assessed for each model, and plots of prediction errors versus actual AQoL utility scores were used to gauge bias. Each model closely predicted the average AQoL utility score for the overall sample (actual mean AQoL 0.64, range of predicted means 0.63-0.64; actual median AQoL 0.71, range of predicted medians 0.68-0.69). No clear preferred model was identified, and overall, the models predicted 40-46% of the variance in AQoL utility scores. The WOMAC function subscale model performed similarly to the total score model. The models functioned best at the mid-range of AQoL scores, with greater bias observed for extreme scores. Inaccuracies in individual-level estimates and low/high health-related quality of life (HRQoL) subgroup estimates were evident. Reliable overall group-level estimates were produced, supporting the application of these techniques at a population level. Using WOMAC scores to predict individual AQoL utility scores is not recommended, and the models may produce inaccurate estimates in studies targeting patients with low/high HRQoL. Where pain and stiffness data are unavailable, the WOMAC function subscale can be used to generate a reasonable utility estimate.

Cost effectiveness of concurrent gemcitabine and cisplatin with radiation followed by adjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with stages IIB to IVA carcinoma of the cervix

ObjectiveA recent phase III trial reported gemcitabine with cisplatin chemoradiation followed by 2cycles of gemcitabine and cisplatin (G) significantly improved progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to standard cisplatin chemoradiation (C) for locally advanced cervix cancer. We evaluate the cost effectiveness (CE) of these treatment regimens. MethodsA modified Markov model was constructed comparing CE between treatment arms using the published trial's five-year OS and treatment-related toxicity rates. Quality of life (QOL) utility scores during treatment were obtained from published literature and modeled for sensitivity analysis. Cost data was obtained from Medicare reimbursement figures and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. One-way sensitivity analyses assessed variations in cost and adverse events. ResultsMean cost was $41,330 (US$) for C versus $60,974 for G. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for G compared to C was $33,080 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). In sensitivity analyses (SA), the ICER increased to common willingness-to-pay thresholds of 50K and 100K when QOL utility scores during G active treatment declined to 0.64 and 0.53 (baseline 0.76), respectively. The model was insensitive to changes in adverse event rates, costs of treatment, or adverse event hospitalization costs. ConclusionsGemcitabine with cisplatin chemoradiation followed by 2cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin is a cost effective treatment for locally advanced cervix cancer compared to standard cisplatin chemoradiation. Common willingness to pay thresholds are exceeded during sensitivity analyses with realistic declines in QOL. Our results support ongoing investigations of novel adjuvants to standard cisplatin chemoradiation with potentially less toxicity.

Health status and health-related quality of life associated with hemophilia.

The hemophilias are a group of disorders associated with a chronic burden of morbidity and early mortality. Improvements in these adverse features have been achieved by the use of clotting factor concentrates within comprehensive centers of specialized care providing home infusion programs. Offsetting effects from transfusion-transmitted hepatitis and HIV infection are in recent decline. The net impact of these changes merits assessment. To test the a priori hypotheses that increasing severity of factor VIII deficiency would be associated with an increasing burden or morbidity and that hepatitis and HIV positivity would impair health status further, a cross-sectional study of a population-based cohort was undertaken in a regional hemophilia program in Ontario, Canada. A survey was made of mild, moderate, and severe hemophiliacs over 13 years of age who self-reported their health status using a standard 15-item questionnaire. The responses were converted to levels in the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI2) and Mark 3 (HUI3) health status classification systems to form multi-element vectors from which single-attribute morbidity and overall health-related quality of life utility scores were determined. The burden of morbidity was greater in hemophiliacs than in the general population and correlated with the category of disease (mild < moderate < severe). Hepatitis and HIV positivity conferred additional burdens of morbidity, which were mainly in the attributes of mobility (HUI2), ambulation (HUI3), and pain (HUI2/3), all of these differences reaching levels of statistical significance. Despite demonstrable improvements in the safety, effectiveness, and utilization of clotting factor concentrates, hemophiliacs continue to experience an important burden of morbidity. Measurement of this burden, as reported here, provides a basis for future economic evaluation of the costs and consequences of health care interventions provided to this population.

Health-related quality of life in survivors of tumours of the central nervous system in childhood—a preference-based approach to measurement in a cross-sectional study

There is an evident need to measure the comprehensive burden of morbidity experienced by survivors of brain tumours in childhood. To this end, a questionnaire based on the Health Utilities Index mark 2 (HUI2) and mark 3 (HUI3) systems was completed independently for a cohort of such children by their parents, by a nurse, by physicians and by a selected group of the children themselves. Each of the HUI2 and HUI3 systems consists of a multi-attribute health status classification scheme linked to a preference function which provides utility scores for levels within single attributes (domains of health) and for global health states. All eligible families (n=44) participated. Even cognitively impaired children of at least 9.5 years of age could complete the questionnaire. The greatest burden of morbidity, occurring in two-thirds of children, was in the attribute of cognition. Surprisingly, almost one-third of children experienced pain. Global health status was lowest in children who underwent radiotherapy before the age of 5 years and the corresponding utility scores were related inversely to the volume irradiated. Children with demonstrable disease had lower scores than those in whom disease was not evident. There was a high level of agreement (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.5) on formal assessment of inter-rater reliability for global health-related quality of life utility scores. The usefulness of measures of health status and health-related quality of life, in children surviving brain tumours, has been demonstrated by this study.